Showing posts with label adrian jennings. Show all posts
Showing posts with label adrian jennings. Show all posts

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Ubisense Smart Factory: Delivering Never Before Possible Visibility for Manufacturers Worldwide

By Adrian Jennings, CTO Americas

This week, Ubisense announced enhancements to its Smart Factory system that will be available early next year.  Admittedly, we’ve been a tad quiet about Smart Factory so I thought I’d formally introduce you to one of the most advanced location intelligence offerings available to manufacturers today.

Ubisense Smart Factory is a production-certified system that helps manufacturers sustain continuous flow, optimize efficiency and reduce errors in manual assembly processes. By accurately identifying and locating process-critical assets, Smart Factory provides real-time operational awareness, adaptive control and data-driven insights.

Using a sophisticated system that combines advanced hardware (tags and sensors) with software, Ubisense Smart Factory can reveal an entirely new level of visibility to help manufacturers gain efficiencies at a level never before possible. Think massive improvements in quality, productivity, and operational control and costs – all which help manufacturers more effectively manage mass product customization, which is where our world is headed.

For instance, in 2012, car buyers in Europe had 190 different car model choices. In 2019, the number will increase to an estimated 230 different models[1]. Producing that level of variation requires a substantial number of different parts and processes.  How can manufacturers possibly maintain quality by delivering on the demand for customization and choice? Ubisense Smart Factory.


Want to learn more about Smart Factory? Click here to access a video showcasing one example of how Ubisense helped BMW: http://ubisense.net/en/resources/videos.html.




[1] PwC Autofacts 2014 Q2 Data Release

Friday, October 24, 2014

Don’t Get Lost in the Hype

By Adrian Jennings, CTO Americas

Yesterday, I hosted a webinar, Visibility in Manufacturing: The Path to Industry 4.0. To a handful of manufacturers, the coming age of cyber-physical systems is the inevitable next step. For most, however, these concepts are decades away from mass adoption. I advise you not to worry.


Don’t get lost in the hype.


Instead, focus on mastering Industry 3.0 concepts, more specifically - automation, to gain greater visibility and control over your manufacturing operations in the nearer term. Tackling visibility from process to product to department and eventually throughout your entire organization, will feed into and support your ultimate path to Industry 4.0.

Listen, I meet with manufacturers often and I am consistently asked how they compare to others in the industry. So during the webinar, we asked attendees a few questions about the state of their manufacturing operations. Below is the Q&A we conducted.


How close are you to adopting Industry 4.0?
Doing it now 36%
Plan to start in 2015 21%
It's in our five year plan 21%
We haven't even thought about it 21%


Do you spend at least an hour a day searching for assets or products?
Yes 79%
No 21%
How many variations of a product do you build on a single line?
One 0%
Tens 38%
Hundreds 31%
Thousands 31%
What is the main cause of manual errors in your plant?
People 60%
Process 40%

What percentage of wireless tools do you have in your plant?
0-10% 46%
11-20% 31%
21-50% 23%
51% and up 0%

Interestingly enough, the results collected during this webinar are in line with the survey we conducted over the summer that reflects answers from more than 250 manufacturers. So what does this tell us? Many things really, but fundamentally – manufacturers need more visibility so they can improve productivity, efficiency, and their bottom line.

How can manufacturers gain more visibility? During the webinar, I outlined a few steps to consider:

Be SelfishStart small and local. Pick a pain point and tackle it. Prove to your organization and yourself that the technology you choose works.

Be Forward ThinkingUnderstand your next step and ultimate goal and invest in the right infrastructure from the outset.

Be Cooperative Share your success and work with other people and departments. There are significant benefits when the entire organization invests in technology that contributes to greater visibility and control.

Be Supportive Guide other plants through the process to help the organization prepare for the final step – Industry 4.0.

If you’d like to learn more, you can access the webinar on-demand at http://bit.ly/ZJFbwh. Of course, if you have any questions please contact me at Adrian.Jennings@ubisense.net.

Thursday, October 16, 2014

How Do Manufacturers Gauge Performance or Use Real-Time Information?

The 2014 Smart Manufacturing Technologies Survey was designed to collect feedback on how manufacturers use real-time intelligence and to gauge performance indicators such as unscheduled downtime, productivity, and quality issues. The findings from this survey provided Ubisense with a snapshot of the state of the manufacturing industry and clarity into current market needs. This insight helps Ubisense optimize its Smart Factory solution which enables manufacturers to turn data into knowledge and dramatically increase the visibility of their products, movements, and locations. 

Download this Free White Paper to Find Out





Thursday, October 02, 2014

The Promised Land

Written by: Adrian Jennings, CTO of real-time location intelligence solutions

When I was a budding rocket scientist playing with missiles in the wilder parts of England, it always seemed to me that my colleagues across the pond in the US had it so much better. I imagined they were better trained, better resourced and altogether lived in some kind of Promised Land. When I eventually moved to the US I’m not sure whether I was gratified or disappointed to find that they had all the same constraints and issues we faced in the UK. In fact, we had pioneered some techniques that the US was keen to learn.

I imagine it must sometimes feel the same working in a manufacturing plant and reading in the press all about cyber-connected systems, Industry 4.0 and the like. It must often feel like everyone else has better technology and better processes than you, and surely that means they are much farther ahead.

Well, just as I discovered when moving to the US: they don’t have anything better than you, and they aren’t any further ahead. Ubisense’s recent survey of smart technologies in manufacturing revealed exactly that. Whereas a few pioneers have adopted advanced manufacturing technologies, most plants still rely on mostly manual processes and have a distinct lack of operational visibility.

The results of the survey are available in a white paper, which also discusses a path to better visibility and better processes – one that doesn’t require huge technological leaps into some imagined Promised Land. Have a look at the white paper: http://bit.ly/1vpRUPm. You might be comforted to know that many others face the same problems you do. And who knows – maybe you’re the one who’s ahead?


Thursday, September 18, 2014

The Ubisense Team -- Denver, CO

All North American Ubisense employees gathered in Denver, CO for a collaborative and educational 3-day team meeting. 


























Wednesday, May 14, 2014

21 Ways to Chase Waste with Smart Factory


Eliminating waste is an important part of improving your production system. The old way of chasing waste was to wait until it popped up and then chase it down. This reactive approach does not achieve meaningful improvements, and it drains your organization’s energy and resources.

There is a new way to chase waste: use an indoor location tracking solution and let it tell you what you need to know before it becomes a problem. Indoor location tracking can:
  • Notify you immediately when something unexpected occurs, such as a missed step or an incorrect process sequence. Notifications can be done by email, SMS, or visual alert.
  • Help you find inventory that is stuck, abandoned, or misplaced so that all of your equipment is properly utilized.
  • Identify process bottlenecks with real data to help justify change or future investments.
With real-time maps, event alerts, and location information, you can find and eliminate waste efficiently and proactively!  
 
Visualize Your Factory 

Ubisense Smart Factory allows you to easily search for, identify, and find an asset in real time. We know you have goals to meet and products to produce, so we have made our solution simple and intuitive; technology should enable you, not hinder you. Let us show you how it can make your job easier, your processes more efficient, and help you achieve your goal of eliminating waste.

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Ubisense in Action: Global Teams Unite in Cambridge for 2014 Kickoff

Brian Vance (USA), Scott Casey (USA), Kristel Faris (USA), Aubree Topai (USA), Dave Harris (USA), Jim Stippich (USA)
Stefan Schwiers (Germany), Meike Porrmann (Germany), Karsten Schultz (Germany)
Andy Schuerzinger (Germany), Darcie Cousins (UK), Hubert Peyre (France)
Kendall Truitt (USA)
Corey Holland (USA)
Aubree Topai (USA), Kristel Faris (USA)
Janice Kok (Asia), Scott Casey (USA), Bill Riva (USA), Brian Vance (USA)
Adrian Jennings (USA), Jon Heathcote (UK),  Jay Cadman  (USA)
Entire Ubisense Global Sales Team (Germany, France, Asia, Canada, USA, UK) 

Thursday, January 02, 2014

Selecting a Location Intelligent System: Accuracy & Tag Range

When evaluating the suitability of various location intelligent solutions, it is useful to have some technical understanding. In the following blog post we will discuss how location accuracy and tag range play an important part in choosing a location intelligent system. 

LOCATION ACCURACY AND LOCATION CONSISTENCY
Location based applications are most often compared in terms of the accuracy provided by the sensor system. Location accuracy is certainly a critical parameter for quantifying system performance, but when quoted out of context it can prove misleading. A location sensor system is only fully defined when location accuracy is quoted in conjunction with a consistency metric.

Consistency in this context means a measure of how often the location system delivers the stated accuracy. The game of darts provides a simple example: even the most amateur player can score a bulls-eye if enough darts are thrown, but the measure of a good player is: how often can he or she hit the bulls-eye?





Figure 4-1 (above) shows an example of the output of a typical location system (or, the places where the dart hit the board in the above analogy).

This plot is generated by counting the number of measurements that lie within the error circles shown in Figure 4-1. In this example, 20% of the measurements lie within the 3’ error circle, 70% are within the 15’ circle (including those in the 3’ circle) and 97% are inside the 30’ circle. Figure 4-2 shows that data plotted in blue. The orange line shows an example location system with a much tighter constellation of measurements around the true location, with 95% of measurements inside the 3’ error circle.

The blue and orange lines in Figure 4-2 represent a true comparison between location technologies. By simply comparing location accuracy, misleading results can be interpreted if the accuracy figures are quoted at different consistency levels. In the darts analogy, the orange line represents a good player, and the blue line a poor one.


Figure 4-3 shows how consistency levels become important in location enabled applications. In this figure seven zones are shown, with the item being tracked located in the center zone. In the case of a 3’ error measurement the item is correctly associated with the center zone. When the error is 15’ the item could be in one of three zones, and with 30’ error in one of five.


Reading from Figure 4-2 the different location systems can now be fully compared as shown in Table 4-1.


The importance of Table 4-1 is that it compares systems based on not just how well they perform, but how often they perform to that level. It’s clear that both systems can claim to identify the location of a tag to within a single zone, but that the high accuracy system does so with significantly more consistency than the low accuracy system. In a real production environment, location system performance must exceed 99.9% for many mission critical applications.

OVERVIEW OF LOCATION TECHNIQUES
All location intelligence technologies share the common theme of some kind of tag attached to the object being tracked, and an infrastructure of sensors that determine the ID and location of the tag. Such tags may emit optical, ultrasonic or radio frequency energy, but radio frequency (RF) tags are the only ones suited to industrial environments (since optical and ultrasonic signals are too easily jammed or blocked in typical factories).

In all cases the sensing infrastructure attempts to measure either the range or bearing (or both) to a tag from one or more sensors and from that information the tag’s location is calculated. The technologies are predominantly differentiated buy how well they are able to measure range and/or bearing and, as a result, how accurately they are able to determine tag location.

MEASURING SIGNAL STRENGTH
Many location systems make use of the fact that the signal strength from a tag becomes weaker as the tag moves farther from a sensor. These systems measure the signal strength measured by multiple sensors, use that information to estimate the range of the tag from each sensor and then calculate the tag location. Figure 4-4 shows how this works.

In Figure 4-4 it is clear that three sensors are required in order to locate a tag in two dimensions. (By extension, four sensors are required for a 3D location determination.)

Tag location errors are cause by many sources, the dominant of which being variations in signal strength caused by effects other than range. If some other effect acts to reduce the signal strength then the sensor interprets this weak signal as longer range than reality. Figure 4-5 shows how range errors from each sensor contribute to overall tag location error.
Range errors are the limiting factor of signal strength systems since many factors affect signal strength beyond just the spacing of the tag from the sensor. Examples include attenuation due to signal blockage and variations due to tag orientation. The dominant factor, however, is an effect called “multipath” which is a factor in all location system types, and so is worth a short aside to aid in understanding.

When a tag emits a signal, that signal is, by design, emitted in all directions so as to reach as many sensors as possible. This scattergun signal will bounce off any reflective surface, such as metal objects, and a single sensor may hear the signal from one tag echoing off multiple surfaces. The effect is exactly the same as voice echoes heard when shouting in a large cavern or in the mountains.

In a manufacturing environment, which is filled with metallic objects, the chief concern of location systems is to cope with the damaging effects of multipath. For signal strength systems multipath can be very damaging indeed due to an effect known as signal cancellation.

A radio wave is just like a wave on the ocean: an undulating surface which moves along at a certain speed (the speed of light in the case of radio waves). In the ocean, waves can come from multiple directions and when two peaks meet a very large wave can build up locally as the peaks add together. Similarly a peak from one direction can coincide with a trough from another direction and these completely cancel each other leaving no wave at all. The phenomenon is familiar to surfers who understand that waves come in sets: they wait through the periods when the peaks and troughs are cancelling each other leaving very small waves, instead hoping to catch a period of peaks combining with peaks for the biggest surf of the set.

The exact same signal cancellation phenomenon affects radio waves as they bounce off multiple reflectors and arrive at a sensor from many directions. The adding and cancelling of peaks and troughs look to the sensor like increases and decreases in signal strength, which that sensor interprets as decreases and increases in tag range even though the tag may not be moving at all. The result is that the error bands in Figure 4-5 can grow very wide due to multipath, causing large errors in tag location.

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

5 Steps to an Irrefutable ROI Report



Ubisense is keenly aware that time is valuable and each day that an organization operates without a tracking system means thousands of dollars lost due to operational inefficiencies. You need hard numbers to justify the spend internally but you don’t have time to tackle the research in addition to your day job. We get it and we can help you. We’ve developed a five step process that enables us to gather the information we need to deliver an irrefutable ROI report so you can get what you need.  

Here’s our five-step process:

Step 1: Understand the process or processes that require improvement. Any existing data, such as value stream maps or efficiency studies, are reviewed if available.

Step 2: Ubisense visits your site to review the process(es) that require improvement in detail. The best starting point for this review is a physical walkthrough of the process (es) typically with the person who oversees the department. During this walkthrough, a critical Q&A session occurs to understand every aspect of the process(es), including all the ways things don’t go according to plan.

Step 3: On the same day, we regroup in a conference room and walk through the process(es) again, referring to a facility map, taking copious notes on process flow and gathering as many metrics as are available.

Step 4: The final stage of the site visit is to understand the financial terms for how operational efficiency is measured, and whether any specific company goals are being pursued. From this on-site visit, we learn about the great variability and customization of each individual product that makes the customer’s manufacturing process highly complex and difficult to manage.

Step 5: Ubisense delivers an irrefutable ROI report that includes the hard numbers and timeframe specific to your business operations, and you have the proof you need to gain purchasing approval



Friday, February 24, 2012

When Should a Transit Agency Start to Worry About its Technology Infrastructure?

By Adrian Jennings
Published in MassTransit Magazine
Feb 9, 2012

Technology infrastructure in a transit yard may not be at the top of most people’s minds, but there are some simple indicators that suggest when it’s time to be worried.

Indoor location systems are becoming widely adopted to solve all of the problems with a single solution. These location systems use sensors and tags to keep track of vehicles indoors just like GPS satellites and tags keep track of them outdoors. By knowing the precise location of vehicles and integrating this with information from maintenance, dispatch, scheduling and vehicle equipment databases, operators are gaining new visibility into their operations and control over their fleet of vehicles.

Yard Visibility

Does “yard visibility” mean referring to a handwritten markup sheet generated by a manual yard audit? Then it’s time to be worried about your technology infrastructure.
Markup sheets provide a simple visual reference for understanding where vehicles are located, but suffer from two key limitations: in any manual, repetitive process like a yard audit, mistakes can be made, and given the constant movement of vehicles, the information from any given yard audit is quickly out of date.

An indoor location system can completely replace manual audits and markup sheets with an automatic, real-time vehicle location system. As mentioned, such a system operates much like GPS, with tags on vehicles being tracked not by satellites (which cannot see indoors) but by sensors mounted in the ceiling of the yard. This network of sensors updates the location of vehicles several times a minute with an accuracy of just a few feet. The result is an electronic markup sheet that shows the exact location and identity of all vehicles in the yard and updates that information constantly.

This is the core value of an indoor location system, and it was this that led Metro Transit in Minneapolis to be among the first to adopt such a system. The yard audit task typically took between 30 and 60 minutes, and with buses constantly in motion the data required constant updating. Audits were performed on an almost hourly basis, and were often out-of-date before a single round of the facility was complete. The inefficiencies of this process were clear to Metro Transit at different levels: in the time taken to collect the data; in the effects of inaccurate bus location data such as poor on-time departures due to blocked buses; and in the time wasted by maintenance staff searching for vehicles.

In order to realize the full potential of its location system, Metro Transit was quick to realize that having bus location information in electronic form created an opportunity to bring together multiple software systems.

Software Application Integration

Does software application integration mean running different applications on different computers and manually entering information from one system into the other? Then it’s time to be worried about your technology infrastructure.

Once the markup sheet is in electronic form, a huge amount of added value can be incorporated into the yard map view. The first software integration point is to connect the electronic map with the vehicle equipment database so that a simple mouse-click on any vehicle icon reveals a wealth of information: bus length, diesel or hybrid, wheelchair accessible, etc. Some of these attributes can also be indicated visually using different icons and colors making the markup sheet a rich source of useful information-at-a-glance. Need the next available hybrid ready to be dispatched? Electronic surveillance contractor needs a map of all buses with DVRs? That information can reliably be available all the time.

Metro Transit went one step beyond this and also integrated information from the dispatch and maintenance systems. This allowed the map display to show vehicle attributes and also route assignments and maintenance status. For maintenance, the bus icon would change to show a minor or critical fault so that a dispatcher had immediate feedback if a vehicle was not ready to be assigned.

Coordinated Operations

Does “coordinated operations” mean picking up the phone or leaving a note to pass critical information between departments? Then it’s time to be worried about your technology infrastructure.

When the RĂ©seau de transport de Longueuil (RTL) public transportation service in Longueuil, Quebec, adopted an indoor location system, the technology had become more than a yard information tool: it was now a yard automation tool. With a rich set of integrated data deeply linked to bus location, RTL was able to streamline many operations simultaneously improving quality of service and efficiency.

At RTL, the electronic map display can not only be used to provide data about vehicles, but also to perform operations like assigning buses to routes, assigning drivers to buses, etc. To assign a bus to a route, a dispatcher simply has to drag-and-drop a bus icon onto one of the routes displayed in a list. Any bus showing a critical fault will immediately be rejected to prevent safety issues. When a driver arrives at the start of a shift he approaches an electronic kiosk where he swipes his smart card to be given his route and bus assignment, along with a map showing where the bus is located. Digital displays throughout the yard help direct him to the bus to expedite pullout.

This is a typical example of how operations can be coordinated once all information is integrated into one place along with the exact location of the vehicle. These operations can be as diverse as dispatch, maintenance, revenue drop, cleaning, fueling, etc. As more information is integrated into a single application, more decision making can be automated.

Intuitive User Interface

Does “Intuitive GUI” remind you more of the life forms evolving in your fridge than the user interfaces for your current computer applications? Then it’s time to be worried about your technology infrastructure.

Most people today have become rather adept at using graphical user interfaces (GUIs), and a well-thought-out GUI can make your computer experiences much simpler.

A well-designed indoor location system has just such an interface: displaying vehicle location and identification over a map of the facility or facilities. As mentioned previously, the icons that represent vehicles are often color-coded or overlaid with other symbology to indicate critical information just by looking at the map. Maintenance status, vehicle type and home-garage for multi-garage operations are all typical examples of information that are displayed graphically.

Today, indoor location systems are replacing manual markup sheets with reliable, up-to-date electronic maps showing all vehicles across one or many facilities. By integrating this information with other data sources, indoor location systems are streamlining and error-proofing dispatch and pullout, improving maintenance efficiency and optimizing parking to avoid time wasted due to blockage. But what of the future?

A Better Way

When you are surrounded by paperwork, trying to use computer applications that frustrate more than they help, the best way to know what’s going on is to get up and walk the yard. Do you think that there must be a better way to manage a yard? Then it’s time to get excited about your technology infrastructure.

Indoor location systems are transforming yard operations first by providing yard information, then yard automation. But how far can that go? A few “day in the life” vignettes can help illustrate where indoor location systems can take yard management.

The driver arrives at the yard at the start of his shift and approaches the electronic kiosk. When he swipes his smart card he not only clocks-in for his shift, but also receives his day’s driving assignment and a map to the bus he has been allocated. As he walks through the garage, digital signs help direct him to his assigned bus. When he reaches the bus he’s happy to see the one parked in front just pulling out: no blockage and no late-pullout today. On his inspection of the bus he notices a flat tire: this bus is going nowhere. He reports this using his mobile device — a few taps on the touchscreen and he is given his new bus assignment and a map of its location. This time there is no blockage and no flat tire, and he pulls out on time.

During the day he notices a vibration through the steering column and reports it on his touchscreen console. When he arrives at the yard at the end of the shift he is directed to the next available revenue drop, then given instructions and a map about where to park.
The dispatcher has already defined the route requirements when the day starts. Each route has been flagged with vehicle requirements: one route through the city center, for example, requires a hybrid bus with a particular vinyl wrap advertising an upcoming movie. When all of the route requirements are defined, the auto-dispatch module takes a few moments to allocate buses to routes based on the bus type and configuration, maintenance status and position in the yard.

During the pullout process one driver reports a flat tire, immediately activating the auto-dispatch module. The bus is flagged for maintenance pickup and the entire remaining dispatch plan is redone to ensure that the correct buses still pull out on time and onto the correct routes. Account is taken of the fact that the disabled bus is now blocking all buses in the row behind it, and all affected drivers get their revised bus assignments on their mobile devices.

At end of day, maintenance reports one bus has a critical fault causing a steering vibration and the estimated repair time is 22 hours. The auto-dispatch module updates the pullout plan, and the auto parking module adjusts its parking assignments for the rest of the buses to ensure minimum overnight shuffling.

The maintenance worker gets an alert on his mobile device that a bus has a flat tire and is directed to its location. The wheel can be changed on-site, and when complete he registers the fault as rectified and the auto-dispatch system reincorporates that vehicle into its plan.

Later that day he receives another alert directing him to the right location to pick up a bus with a steering column vibration. When he starts the bus he is notified that diesel pump #3 happened to be free and is directed to take the opportunity to fill the tank. When he arrives at the pump, the bus identity and type is automatically registered and the pump activated since the fuel type is a match. When full, the pump flags the bus as refueled and records the amount of diesel used into the bus’s record.

So, how far into the future is the vision of the smart yard? The building blocks are already in place and software applications are maturing rapidly. The fundamental foundation of location systems and data integration are already available, with the automation modules either already available or in development.

For the complete article, visit www.MassTransitmag.com/10614025. MT

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Snapshot or movie? Exploring the differences between RFID and RTLS

The terms Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) and Real-Time Location System (RTLS) can cause confusion since they are often used interchangeably. In fact, they mean something very different and RFID and RTLS solutions are used in very different ways.

RFID is the term used to describe the wireless retrieval of an identification code from an electronic tag using a radio signal emitted from the tag. These systems were developed to solve some of the shortcomings of barcodes, which can only be read at very short range, are easily damaged and become unreadable - if you can’t see the barcode you can’t read it. RFID systems solve this problem by using a radio signal rather than an optical scanner, and that radio signal can be read over longer ranges, even when no line-of sight exists between the tag and the reader. RFID tags come in two varieties: passive and active. Passive tags use no battery, and instead derive power from the radio signal emitted by a reader. These tags can truly be thought of as “next generation barcodes.” By contrast, active tags are powered by batteries, and as a result can transmit signals much further (10s and even more than hundred meters). This type of tag has advantages in certain situations but the battery makes them more expensive both from a manufacturing and maintenance standpoint.

Degrees of location

Real-Time Location Systems (RTLS) not only retrieve the ID of an electronic tag but also pinpoint its location in real-time. In order to do this, the signal from the tag is received at multiple sensor locations which use methods such as triangulation or multilateration to calculate the tag position. This seems to be very different from the definition of an RFID system. So why is there confusion? The confusion comes from defining exactly what is meant by “location information” and the following examples helps to illustrate the point.

Area location

RFID systems only provide
 limited location information
A single RFID reader is placed at the center of a warehouse,and items are identified using long range RFID tags. Since the reader cannot physically hear tags outside the warehouse, it makes a list of all the tags that it can hear, and labels them as “in the warehouse.” In this case “in the warehouse” is location information derived from an RFID system comprising a single reader and active tags.

Proximity location

Two RFID readers are placed at either end of a warehouse populated as above with active tags. Both readers hear all tags, but they are connected via a network to a software application which compares the signal strength received. For a given tag, this application determines that the northern reader is receiving far more signal than the southern reader, and determines that the tag is therefore in the northern part of the warehouse. Again “in the northern part of the warehouse” is location information derived from a RFID system comprising multiple readers and active tags.

Choke point location

A single RFID reader is placed over a doorway, under which items pass which are identified using passive tags. The reader can only detect tags that are within 1,5 meters (due to their short range), confirming that any tag that it does hear must be in the vicinity of the doorway. Each tag ID is recorded as “at the doorway” along with the time at which it was detected. In this case “at the doorway” is location information derived from a RFID system comprising a single reader and passive tags.

Real-time location

A network of RTLS sensors is distributed throughout a building, and items in the building are identified using active tags. Anywhere in the building, multiple sensors can receive the signal from a given tag and measure either its signal strength, its time of arrival or its angle of arrival (or sometimes more than one of these). This information is passed via a network to an application that calculates the tags coordinates in the building. In this case “coordinates in the building” is location information derived from a network of RTLS sensors and active tags.

RTLS allows users to identify products at any stage
 of the assembly line and to control processes
based on the relative location of
products, tools, and mobile devices.
A better definition

These examples make both the reason for the confusion and the solution clear. Any system can be thought of as providing “location information” - even a barcode scanner. But a better definition of the term “RTLS” can immediately distinguish these systems from RFID systems: A Real-Time Location System is any system using a network of sensors to determine the coordinates of a tag in real-time, anywhere within an instrumented area. Using this definition we immediately understand that “in the warehouse” and “at the door just a minute ago” do not fall under the definition of RTLS. Rather “on shelf B7 on aisle 9 of the warehouse” and “entering through the door and turning towards aisle 3” are the hallmarks of location information delivered by an RTLS solution.This definition also makes no mention of radio frequency on purpose. RFID very clearly means radio frequency ID, without exception.


One further differentiator is that RTLS tags and sensors, whereas predominantly RF, can also use other technologies such as infrared and ultrasound. A good way to think about the difference is to think of RFID as a fixed still camera, and RTLS as a panning video camera. The fixed still camera can provide information about the scene within its field of view at the time a photo is taken. By contrast, a video camera that can pan and zoom provides continuous, real-time scene information over the entire area. This is the fundamental difference between RFID and RTLS: snapshot vs. movie. A series of snapshots at strategic times and locations can help build a picture of what was going on in the past, but only a video camera with a live feed can give real-time information about what’s going on, all the time.  That’s the power of RTLS.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Cheers to Ubisense going public!


Even though Ubisense went public 5 months ago, we thought these pictures deserved to be posted!


Cheers!! Ubisense Americas team

 
<><>
<>
<><>
<>
Ubisense UK team celebrating on the river
 
Peter Batty, Ubisense Americas team
Ubisense Delivery Team on site

Adrian Jennings, Ubisense Americas team

Ubisense France team
Ubisense Americas Delivery team